3 network not honouring warranty

Sam Vimes

A mate of mine bought a 6280 from the 3 network in december that broke, it wouldn't turn on.

Since buying the phone he's ported his number back to vodafone and when he phoned 3 they told him that as soon he moved his number he voided the 2 year warranty on the phone so they wouldn't repair it.

I'm wondering if its legal for them to do that

Rhonda9000

The phone operators contract / terms of sale would stipulate if this is the case, so check it and see.

There is nothing blatantly illegal about this if they want to do it [so long as it is in the contract - it probably is]. Network operators subsidize handsets in order to lure customers in. This is expensive to do and so they want to customers to stay on the network for enough time to make the subsidizing worth their while. The handset is the bonus for the customer but the contract is what matters to the network. If you're gone from the network they dont want you enjoying what they subsidized.

Sponge Bob

if he left BECAUSE they would not fix his phone he can go to the small claims court. The 3 contract is null and void if they would not provide him with the working phone bit of it.

Random

The handset is separate from the contract isn't it?

Anyway, he should be careful if he sends it away for repair with 3 as they'll no doubt lock it again with their software and he'll have to go through their unlock "procedure" again.

Sam Vimes

Rhonda9000, they might not want to fix a phone for someone who's not on the network and they can write whatever they want in the terms and conditions but if they're against the law they don't really matter.

Are you sure they're allowed void a warranty on a product 7 months after its bought?

Also, it was a pre pay phone so its not like it only cost him a few euro

spongebob, if your phone breaks that absolutely, 100% definitely does not make your contract null and void. Please stop telling people that

Random

Do you have receipt? Quick and easy option is to probably send it to fonefix or mprc

chrislad

Commander Vimes wrote:

spongebob, if your phone breaks that absolutely, 100% definitely does not make your contract null and void. Please stop telling people that

Seconded, thirded, fourthed and fifthed for emphasis!

Sponge Bob

IF your phone breaks AND the network who supplied it will not fix it THEN you may ask the SCC to void the contract

Its an unfair contract if you CANNOT avail of the service BECAUSE you have no working phone.

BUt the network that sold you the phone in order that you avail of the contract and complete the full contract MUST be given the 3 chances to fix the phone FIRST.

Sam Vimes

After 3 repair attempts the person gets a replacement, not a voided contract

Sponge Bob

Commander Vimes wrote:

After 3 repair attempts the person gets a replacement, not a voided contract

After 3 repair attempts the person SHOULD get a replacement yes. Thats the law.

If they don't replace it ....say they insist that it go back to Nokia ..and we all know the crap that shops come up with around here in denying their responsibilities as merchants under the sale of goods act ...then the court can be used to determine the contract .

The contract becomes unfair simply because it is impossible to benefit from a mobile network contract IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A WORKING PHONE .

Rhonda9000

Commander -

I say this only as the network would act as agent for the phone manufacturer when there is a breach of warranty and the unit needs to be repaired. The network may be unwilling to support an ex-customer who has left the network contrary to their service contract. If this is the case, approaching the manufacturer directly with proof of purchase would seem to be the ex-customers option regarding repairs. I am nowhere near 100% on this as it is not an area of interest / [relative] expertise, especially regarding network migration delay clauses for pay as you go accounts.

Sam Vimes

Sponge Bob wrote:

After 3 repair attempts the person SHOULD get a replacement yes. Thats the law.

If they don't replace it ....say they insist that it go back to Nokia ..and we all know the crap that shops come up with around here in denying their responsibilities as merchants under the sale of goods act ...then the court can be used to determine the contract .

The contract becomes unfair simply because it is impossible to benefit from a mobile network contract IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A WORKING PHONE .

so in the other thread you said a broken phone voids the contract. Then you said that it voids it after 3 repairs, then you said it only voids it if they refuse a replacement after 3 repairs. Which is it?

Btw, no shop should do that. The policy is to get a new one after 3 repairs so if the shop assistant doesn't do that they're making up their own policy.


in a nutshell spongebob, if the shop is following the repair policy there is no case whatsoever to void the contract

@rhonda9000, the problem is that with 3 phones the shops that sold them aren't supposed to take them in for repair. The customer's supposed to phone 3 who send out a bubble wrap free post envelope for it.

So he can't bring it back to where he bought it. And 3 didn't say that they won't honour the warranty, they said the warranty is void. But its not void is it? He can still bring it to mprc himself with his receipt right?

And i rang all the other networks to check their policies and they said that the fact that someone has ported makes no difference. They supplied the phone so they honour the warranty, as it should be

Sam Vimes

Just remembered something. I'm fairly sure it is illegal. When you buy something, your contract isn't with the manufacturer, its with the people you bought it off so they can't tell you to go back to the manufacturer under any circumstances. They took the money, not nokia, and its their responsibility to deal with any repairs

Sponge Bob

Commander Vimes wrote:

Just remembered something. I'm fairly sure it is illegal. When you buy something, your contract isn't with the manufacturer, its with the people you bought it off so they can't tell you to go back to the manufacturer under any circumstances. They took the money, not nokia, and its their responsibility to deal with any repairs

we are getting somewhere

They have 3 attempts to repair, this could be a software change or a sim change or a physical send away and get it back.

Your contract for a functioning Nokia IS with the 3 shop , aka the MERCHANT , so if the 3 shop has failed to 'repair' after 3 attempts its replacement time. I dont care if the manager is not there on the day, it changes nothing.

If they REFUSE to replace then is court time and you may as well seek to void the contract.

Random

I'm very interested to hear this. Where does it say the shop gets 3 attempts to repair it?

chrislad

A SIM REPLACEMENT IS NOT A PHONE REPAIR!!!

If your phone wasn't sending texts, a sim replacement would be done to determine whether it was a phone problem or a sim problem. A sim swap takes 20 minutes, a repair can take 10 working days and crucially, involves a qualified technician. A software change, again, is NOT A REPAIR. It's changing a setting on a phone to see if a setting has been changed. This would be your logic.

Phone not sending SMS. Staff inspects phone and sees message center number is not correct. Staff updates center number and phone works. Does this count as a repair? If you answer, yes, it brings up the point of how the message center number was changed, which would technically be voiding of the warranty under your logic. If staff checking settings is a 'repair', why isn't a customer ****ing up settings a warranty violation. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!!!

Repairs are software upgrades, replacement part and swap outs by an authorised repair center (which are, AFAIK, Sigma Telecom and BPI for Vodafone, Meteor and O2)

*deep breath*

chrislad

ciaranfo wrote:

I'm very interested to hear this. Where does it say the shop gets 3 attempts to repair it?

It doesn't. It says repair within a reasonable timeframe. What's a reasonable timeframe depends on the item. The policies are generally that a phone will be swapped out if the same problem occurs 3 times within a 90 day period.

Gillo

Did your friend get the phone unlocked by 3 or a third party?

Using a third party to unlock the phone would void the warranty.

Sam Vimes

Everything chrislad said was correct but i think a 90 day period is a bit unfair since the repair companies sometimes have it for over a month. The phone could only go away twice in 3 months and never leave the shop

@spongebob, since i work in a phone shop i want to come to your house and strangle you for repeating that incorrect information over and over. You're going to make my job and loads of other sales assistants jobs a nightmare. Everyone who works with me will be there too

Sam Vimes

gillo wrote:

Did your friend get the phone unlocked by 3 or a third party?

Using a third party to unlock the phone would void the warranty.

he never got it unlocked

chrislad

Commander Vimes wrote:

Everything chrislad said was correct but i think a 90 day period is a bit unfair since the repair companies sometimes have it for over a month. The phone could only go away twice in 3 months and never leave the shop

@spongebob, since i work in a phone shop i want to come to your house and strangle you for repeating that incorrect information over and over. You're going to make my job and loads of other sales assistants jobs a nightmare. Everyone who works with me will be there too

From experience, they're lenient with it. They don't count repair times, and some companies have a policy where if it's gone for more than x amount of days, they'll replace it.

As for the actual topic, if he bought it from Three, he is entitled to a repair under warranty, simple as. Them refusing is breaking the law. There's no need for discussion. If they refuse, tell them you will take it further. If they still don't do anything, just take them to small claims court.

Rhonda9000

Commander Vimes wrote:

@rhonda9000, the problem is that with 3 phones the shops that sold them aren't supposed to take them in for repair. The customer's supposed to phone 3 who send out a bubble wrap free post envelope for it.

Oh I wasn't aware of this.

Commander Vimes wrote:

So he can't bring it back to where he bought it. And 3 didn't say that they won't honour the warranty, they said the warranty is void. But its not void is it? He can still bring it to mprc himself with his receipt right?

Probably put this one down to someone on the phones using words they don't know the proper meaning of. They say "void" but what they mean is they will no longer act as agent for the warranty [I would think]. The warranty is not void - the warranty is provided by the manufacturer which does not involve itself in any way with the service contract from the network operator. Obviously its added inconvenience for the consumer and would be / is used as a type of penalty for them backing out of their service contract with the phone network. There is nothing to stop the customer bringing it to manufacturer with the receipt, but clearly the Nokias of the world have more time for the multi-million networks than Joe Soaps singular broken phone.

Commander Vimes wrote:

And i rang all the other networks to check their policies and they said that the fact that someone has ported makes no difference. They supplied the phone so they honour the warranty, as it should be

This may be the case also - it all depends on the terms each incorporate into their service contract with the customer and the penalties they impose for breaking the contract. It may also be the case that the worker drone in the 3 call centre simply sees on their computer screen "Customer has left network, do not offer service" and is not aware that this is not entirely true [if the network was still obliged to act as agent for the manufacturer warranty].